Baader Classic Ortho 10mm

[Jimtheslim]

Just thought I would put a couple of lines in for anyone considering these eyepieces. I had my first night out with my 10mm last night, being used in my 10" f/4.7. All I can say is that this is one great little eyepiece. Until now I had been using Meade plossls which had offered a nicer view than the eyepieces provided with the scope, so I was curious as to how much an improvement an ortho would be. Having received reassurance that it would be a good buy I decided to go for the 10mm.

I started with Jupiter at twilight, often my favourite time. Having allowed the scope (and a nice gin and tonic) to cool down I put the eyepiece in. At this juncture I might comment that these eyepieces are fairly lightweight, they certainly don't have the weight and feeling of gravity of other larger eyepieces, however they are a nice mat black and you can see there is little opportunity for stray light to go bouncing around. The shielding eye cup looked a bit strange and I wondered how I would get on with it. 

I could instantly pick out not just the equatorial belts, but the polar regions and the temperate belts as well. These details I would have to wait and look for with my 12mm plossl but would be evident. What struck me was the amount of contrast between the belts and the contrast of the planet against the background sky which was heavily darkened compared with the colour you would see with the naked eye. I swapped over for my plossl and even though the magnification is slightly different, it was clear that the colour contrast was improved. The view through the ortho did deteriorate somewhat toward the outer edge of the field of view, becoming elongated, however this was only when it was allowed much further to the edge than I would normally let it go so it wasn't a problem, it was a lot better than the plossl. The other thing that pleased me was the control of any stray light. The plossl would suffer a little from glare, producing something of a light cross  coming from the disc of the planet, this was not evident at all in the ortho.

At this point I went inside and unfortunately my views of Jupiter were ruined by a neighbouring bonfire upon my return. However as it died down I got a few fleeting views of good seeing. The GRS was now in transit and unmistakable.

Mars then came through my gap in the trees and although slightly unsteady at its edges I was able to see detail on the face of the planet for the first time. I tried it with the 12mm plossl and it was just too washed out and suffering from glare to pick anything out.

Saturn then came through and this was simply stunning in this eyepiece. I thought I had seen it well before, having been able to pick out the Casini Division. However with the Ortho there were at least 3 moons clearly visible. The Casini Division was immediately on show and remained clearly defined even when there was a little heat haze. For the first time I could make out bands of colour on the planet and it was easy to make out which way round the rings were going relative to the disc of the planet. 

So all in all I am very happy with this eyepiece and will soon be considering the 6mm as the 10mm responded to my cheap Barlow pretty well. The eye cup didn't bother me much but time will tell I suppose. I often try and shield that side of my left eye with a hood, so having an eye cup block off the light seemed to help. Above all else it was the contrast and the amount of colour that struck me. Not sure how it will fare on DSO's, but I have high hopes the moon should be good. If you want a great little eyepiece for planetary that is forgiving in a short focal ratio scope then I can vouch for these. No buyers remorse here.

[laudropb]

Sounds like you have found a winner there.

[John]

They are excellent eyepieces. The deep sky performance of the 10mm and 18mm is pretty special as well you will be pleased to hear

[Jimtheslim]

1 hour ago, John said:

They are excellent eyepieces. The deep sky performance of the 10mm and 18mm is pretty special as well you will be pleased to hear

I am very pleased to hear! I could see straight away that the darkening of the sky compared to the plossl would give me an advantage. Just need to wait for some good, dark nights to come along...not that I would want to usher out the summer already

[jetstream]

Congrats Jim! The 10mm BCO is one of the best eyepieces made IMO- it will beat most EP's out there.The 10mm barlows well, have you considered a Baader VIP barlow? My 10mm BCO can go over 3x barlowed and stay razor sharp....

[F15Rules]

Lovely report Jim and a great holiday breakfast read:-).

The BCO range are very good EPs for the money and so light in weight. I think the on axis sharpness and contrast are the  biggest plus points of these and although the slightly "artificially enlarged" 50 degree field of view does distort a little at the very edges, I actually think it frames some views more nicely than the more usual 40 or so degrees of a "normal" Ortho.

I also really like the eyecup, for me it really does cut down on stray light- like next door's wretched conservatory lights!

Dave

[Dave In Vermont]

I've never met an orthoscopic EP I didn't like! The only downside to these is the often short eye-relief. This limits their use, with the smaller one's like 6mm, for people who need to wear glasses while observing. The orthoscopics are a simple design of only 4 lenses in 2 sets of 1 & 3. They have been around a long time. And still one of the best for teasing out fine detail on objects such as planets.

In pre-TeleVue® times, ortho's were THE eyepiece people dreamed of. Below I'll leave an eyepiece-configuration chart.

Enjoy!

Dave

 

[Jimtheslim]

1 hour ago, jetstream said:

Congrats Jim! The 10mm BCO is one of the best eyepieces made IMO- it will beat most EP's out there.The 10mm barlows well, have you considered a Baader VIP barlow? My 10mm BCO can go over 3x barlowed and stay razor sharp....

I had been considering the Q2.25 Barlow, however I can never make my mind up as to whether I like Barlows or not. On paper they make sense as they increase your eyepiece range, however I find myself constantly switching it in and out and wondering whether to just buy another eyepiece to fill the gap, rather than adding more glass to the light train. Maybe it's the stock x2 barlow I have been using, but loosing some of the sharpness, even when unscrewing the elements and using it as a x1.5 means I often just leave it and try and relax and enjoy the view through just the eyepiece on it's own. Put simply, if I sell my old scope, along with it's stock barlow I can't see myself rushing to buy a new one, unless the more expensive ones are that much better?

[Jimtheslim]

1 hour ago, F15Rules said:

Lovely report Jim and a great holiday breakfast read:-).

The BCO range are very good EPs for the money and so light in weight. I think the on axis sharpness and contrast are the  biggest plus points of these and although the slightly "artificially enlarged" 50 degree field of view does distort a little at the very edges, I actually think it frames some views more nicely than the more usual 40 or so degrees of a "normal" Ortho.

I also really like the eyecup, for me it really does cut down on stray light- like next door's wretched conservatory lights!

Dave

Thanks, I'm afraid I'm still too much of a newbie to go into technical details such as field stops, calculating true field of view etc, but I am still learning. It was more of a heads up for people like myself who are still getting some decent kit together for a good bit of simple planetary observing, to let them know that BCO's seem to be money very well spent. Buying new for £50 was pushing it a bit for me, but well worth it, I can see this being my go-to planetary eyepiece for quite some time. I've always been a fan of simplicity. I'm sure the exotic wide-field eyepieces are easy to throw money at, and going back to smaller field of view might be painful if you invest in them but for someone like me who might only get a couple of hours outside for some observational astronomy every once in a while these simple, sharp little eyepieces make it something to really look forward to. I guess the lack of them on the used market such as ebay speaks volumes about how much people like to hold on to them.

[jetstream]

5 hours ago, Jimtheslim said:

I had been considering the Q2.25 Barlow, however I can never make my mind up as to whether I like Barlows or not. On paper they make sense as they increase your eyepiece range, however I find myself constantly switching it in and out and wondering whether to just buy another eyepiece to fill the gap, rather than adding more glass to the light train. Maybe it's the stock x2 barlow I have been using, but loosing some of the sharpness, even when unscrewing the elements and using it as a x1.5 means I often just leave it and try and relax and enjoy the view through just the eyepiece on it's own. Put simply, if I sell my old scope, along with it's stock barlow I can't see myself rushing to buy a new one, unless the more expensive ones are that much better?

You will be well served with the Q barlow if you decide to get one. I like using mid FL orthos with a good barlow- it maintains a reasonable eyerelief and has zero drawbacks optically. BTW the 10mm BCO is a better all round eyepiece than the Tak 12.5mm ortho (or equivalent) IMHO. The Tak while like a razor on lunar/planetary falls short on DSO contrast by a noticeable bit under good conditions.

The 18mm BCO is fantastic on many things but for neb work a wider field is my preference, a 82 deg ES is a great option here.

Did you check out Johns excellent review of the BCO ? or Alvin Hueys take on them? ( faintfuzzies.com)

[Jimtheslim]

yes I think I have read the review of the BCO's, or at least quite a lengthy one somewhere comparing them to what appear to be much loved Genuine Orthos. I don't wear glasses so therefore eye relief isn't really an issue. When I have a spare £50 for astro stuff I will have a bit of a dilemma, the Q barlow or the 6mm. Or I might go the other way and get a medium power BST.

[CraigT82]

I had first light last night with my new set of BCOs (18, 10 & 6).

I'm extremely pleased with them! I had some good skies last night and spent most of the time observing the moon, but also a little bit of Saturn and Mars. 

The views of the whole moon through the 18mm were beautiful, can't say more than that really!

The 6mm is an absolute peach. The on axis sharpness has to be seen to be believed. I had a bit of a shootout between this and my 6.5mm Morpheus and the extra-fine detail was easier to make out in the ortho than the Morpheus.  It wasn't that it wasnt there in the Morpheus, I just had to work harder to get it.  On Mars I preferred the view through the Morpheus - no real reason why... Just aesthetics I suppose. on Saturn the ortho won out due to easier picking out of the cloud bands on the planetary surface. Again it was just easier with the ortho than the Morpheus.  Of course this is all offset by the increased nudging! I feel that on Jupiter, a target which you really have to sit and wait and watch , the moprheus will remain my favourite due to the wide angle and better comfort. 

I initially thought the tiny eye lens and tight eye relief would be an issue with the 6mm ortho but that wasn't the case at all. I found it relatively comfortable to use and I like the winged eye cups. 

You should get the others in the set. You won't regret it! When you absolutely positively gotta make out the smallest details possible... You need the 6mm BCO

[spaceboy]

I picked up a 10mm BCO not so long back for solar Ha & WL observing and I have been very pleased. I had the 6mm BCO some years ago and that was also a good performer. The edges can show some aberrations but they have roughly 8-10° FOV advantage over most orthoscopic eyepieces.

[Jimtheslim]

3 hours ago, spaceboy said:

I picked up a 10mm BCO not so long back for solar Ha & WL observing and I have been very pleased. I had the 6mm BCO some years ago and that was also a good performer. The edges can show some aberrations but they have roughly 8-10° FOV advantage over most orthoscopic eyepieces.

I am seriously considering the 6mm

[chiltonstar]

Another vote for this EP!

I'm not an eyepiece obsesser, but I bought one of these recently to go with my 180 Mak. Impressive! The views of a range of double stars were textbook with bitingly sharp Airy disks and diffraction rings. Mars was stable and sharp at x270, with a clear N polar cap, haze across the S pole and Syrtis eerily almost inky black. Saturn didn't disappoint either, with very good contrast for Cassini and some inner ring detail - far better than I've seen before this year. Negatives? (i) the rubber eye cup seems a bit daft, and (ii) the EP is so good I might be tempted to buy some more.....

Chris

[Jimtheslim]

10 hours ago, chiltonstar said:

Another vote for this EP!

I'm not an eyepiece obsesser, but I bought one of these recently to go with my 180 Mak. Impressive! The views of a range of double stars were textbook with bitingly sharp Airy disks and diffraction rings. Mars was stable and sharp at x270, with a clear N polar cap, haze across the S pole and Syrtis eerily almost inky black. Saturn didn't disappoint either, with very good contrast for Cassini and some inner ring detail - far better than I've seen before this year. Negatives? (i) the rubber eye cup seems a bit daft, and (ii) the EP is so good I might be tempted to buy some more.....

Chris

I'm about to spend some money and can't decide between the 6mm BCO or the 2.25 barlow. For me it was the sharpness and colour contrast. The darkening of the sky around objects is very impressive.

[YKSE]

Very nice observations Chris, having read lots of your sharp observations comments but not that often seeing you on this section.

[chiltonstar]

1 hour ago, YKSE said:

Very nice observations Chris, having read lots of your sharp observations comments but not that often seeing you on this section.

I leave the eyepiece comments/reviews to the folk with fast scopes who need very good quality glass - my scopes are mainly long focal length and will tolerate less good EPs. My old 9mm ortho is past its best (fungus) so I tried to find a near-replacement and the Baader Classic certainly fits the bill!

Chris

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I love my 25mm Ortho, but always had problems with anything shorter, even the 18mm. Simply a matter of eye relief. The 18mm has just 14.4mm, so my glasses collide with the EP, especially if the lens is recessed even just a smidgen. 

[YKSE]

35 minutes ago, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

I love my 25mm Ortho, but always had problems with anything shorter, even the 18mm. Simply a matter of eye relief. The 18mm has just 14.4mm, so my glasses collide with the EP, especially if the lens is recessed even just a smidgen. 

Yes, 14.4mm ER is not really enough for glasses to see the whole FOV, even if orthos has convex eye lens which has more useful ER than those with concave eye lens. We have all different observing preferences and techniques too. Field stop for me is for identifying center where I prefer to observe, therefore it's good enough for me to see part of field stop, so 10mm BCO works for me with glasses on, even if the ER is only 8mm. With EPs having concave eye lens, such 16mm MV, ER is 12mm, but I had no chance to see field stop, no matter how much I tilt my head.

[AndresEsteban]

On 07/06/2016 at 06:23, Jimtheslim said:

I had been considering the Q2.25 Barlow, however I can never make my mind up as to whether I like Barlows or not. On paper they make sense as they increase your eyepiece range, however I find myself constantly switching it in and out and wondering whether to just buy another eyepiece to fill the gap, rather than adding more glass to the light train. Maybe it's the stock x2 barlow I have been using, but loosing some of the sharpness, even when unscrewing the elements and using it as a x1.5 means I often just leave it and try and relax and enjoy the view through just the eyepiece on it's own. Put simply, if I sell my old scope, along with it's stock barlow I can't see myself rushing to buy a new one, unless the more expensive ones are that much better?

The Q2.25 Barlow is a very fine one only beated by TeleVue Powermates. It also gives the flexibility of a 1.3x barlow when the lens is attached to an eyepiece without the whole lens body. Indeed one of the best barlow for its price in the market!

[Charic]

On 06/06/2016 at 09:07, Jimtheslim said:

...........I have high hopes the moon should be good...........

Did you ever get around to checking?

The last time I was testing my BCO's I was using the Moon as my primary target, observing a very small crater, it was clear, sharp, well defined, although viewed through a veil of street light!  but to my eyes, this small crater was best viewed  through one of my Revelation plossls.
It was after that session I decided to rid the BCO's with the remaining  TeleVue and Meade plossl's. 
 

[Jimtheslim]

Yes I still really like this eyepiece for lunar and planetary. Along with my 11mm Es 82degree I've been having a fantastic time recently. The ES required less nudging but I still find the bco being my go-to when observing Jupiter. 

[AndresEsteban]

The BCO 10mm is an amazing eyepiece! Every time I tested it over DSO fields it suprised me by showing very dim stars not visible with other eyepieces! Don't know if this is due to the low number of glass elements along the optical path, or the special Baader HT coatings. It doesn't matter though, performance is outstanding!!!
I also particularly like to use the 10mm BCO with the original Baader Q 2.25x Barlow! It turns into a superb 4.44 mm eyepiece with excelent eyerelief! I prefer the views with this barlowed 10mm rather than using the 6mm BCO alone.

This eyepiece is a must in any eps. collection, along with the BCO 18 mm, another amazing eyepiece very similar in performance to the 10mm BCO.